On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 10:34:07AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > On 12/18/25 9:33 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 22:59:33 -0500 > > Yury Norov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I deem to drop trace_printk.h from kernel.h - it is more aligned with > >> the idea of unloading the header. The original motivation to keep > >> trace_printk.h in kernel.h was just because a similar printk.h is living > >> there. But after all, this is a purely debugging header, so no need for > >> almost every C file to bear debugging stuff. > > > > It is a big deal for debugging stuff. A lot of developers debug their code > > with trace_printk(), and do the "shotgun approach", where they cut and > > paste trace_printk()s all over their code in several files. Having to now > > add: > > > > #include <linux/trace_printk.h> > > > > whenever a trace_printk() is added is going to be a big PITA and slow down > > all debugging efforts. > > Eh? Maybe a PITA, but surely not a big one. > Slow down "all debugging efforts?" > Please cut down on the hyperbole.
For me, removing trace_prink.h saves 1.5-2% of compile time: Before: #1 real 5m12.602s #2 real 5m11.333s After: #1 real 5m6.190s #2 real 5m7.151s I'm building ubuntu-derived localyesconfig with a couple extra drivers. Steven, if you're not absolutely against, lets drop the trace_printk.h? Thanks, Yury
